The TRUTH about bow string materials - Is Jake Kaminski Wrong?

Jake Kaminsky is an amazing archer, literally one of the best in the world, and he's put out a bunch of content on YouTube that has helped a lot of people enjoy more archery. And I am all about it because my goal is to help more people enjoy more archery. In today's video, we're going to cover the preferred bow string material of top tier Olympic style recurve shooters. The reason why I'm reviewing this video is because I feel like there were some things that were left out of this video that could help more people enjoy more archery. Jake is an Olympic archer, so he comes from that world. But the world that I come from is a very different world. You go more towards this end of the spectrum, even further left of 8125, and you have 652. Now 652 from BCY bow strings is the original fastflight material which is just 100% spectra. Again Jake is an Olympic archer so why would he look at anything slower or smoother than 652 spectra but the world I come from is a world of hunters and bow builders and it's a very different world. The very bottom of Jake's chart is the top of my chart. that's the fastest string that I would shoot. Whereas on Jake's chart, it's the slowest string that he would shoot. And so, it's just a completely different world. So, I want to add some context for those of you who maybe watch this video and you're like, maybe you built your own bow or maybe you're a hunter and you want a quiet string. And the reason I bring this up is because the title of this video says it's for traditional archers as well as Olympic style archery. And so I just want to add some context for those of us have who have built our own bows or are hunting and you want to quietest string possible. For most traditional archers, the string I would recommend isn't even on this chart that Jake has here. The string that I would recommend is a D97, which is confusing when you look at the chart because D97 is a daema and daema is 8125. But there is a difference between D97 and 8125. So the confusion here is that it's the same material, but the composition is different. So D97 is thicker while 8125 it's still the SK75. The 8125 is thinner and so it stretches less. So 8125 stretches less than FastFlight 652 Spectra and D97 stretches more and so D97 would be to the left of 652 Spectra on this chart. This makes D97 an ideal string for most hunters because it really brings down the noise of the shot, which is a very big deal when it comes to shooting a big game animal, but it doesn't give up too much speed. D97's about 3 to 5 ft per second slower than 652 Spectra. Now, if you've built your own bow and it's not a laminated fiberglass bow, doesn't have reinforced tips, then in that case, I'd recommend a B-55. B-55 falls even further on the scale to the left than D97. So, from the most stretch, it's B-55, which is basically the same as B50 or Dacron, the most gentle on the limbs. And then you move over, you got D97, a little bit more speed, a little bit more harsh on the limbs. Then you get 652 Spectra and then 8125 and Mercury and all of that stuff. I typically would recommend there's a barrier at the 40 lb range. So your 40 lb range, if you're 40 lb and above, you should shoot 20 strands. If you're 40 lbs and below, you should shoot 18 strands. If you're a youth archer, maybe you could shoot 16 strands. If you are an Olympic archer, I would recommend following Jake's recommendations for strand count here. Jake recommends going from a 18 strand to a 20 strand 652 Spectra string when you're going above 40 pounds. He doesn't say why he suggests going thicker on the strands or going more on the strands. And so I can only speculate for our 652 Spectra, our fastflight string, we do a 16 strand string as our standard and we've tested that to over 500 lb and it hasn't broken. So, if the strength of the string is not the issue, why the recommendation of the higher strand count, the only other thing I can think of that a higher strand count benefits in is a bigger surface area. The more strands, the thicker the string is going to be obviously. And where that comes into play is in the loops because if you have a tiny string, very thin, it's going to act almost like a knife to the string grooves. If you're using something that's too thin and has too little stretch, it can literally rip straight down the limbs. But the more strands you do, the more that loop spreads out the surface area and it spreads out that weight so it doesn't there's not a chance of it cutting into the limb. It spreads that out. That's why some people um ask for padded loops. Um, so that's adding extra strands just to the loop, but then leaving the rest of the string with fewer strands because less mass means more speed. But then when you go with less mass, it can be dangerous for the bow. So patting the loops and going less mass than the rest of the string can make it a faster string, but still safe for your bow. That's kind of what our invincible string does as well, because we serve the loop and then do the Flemish twist. And so that extra serving adds more surface area to spread out that load. So when it comes to strand count, fewer strands is faster because it's less mass. Yes, more strands will be stronger, but when that breaking point is so far above what we're drawing with 50 to 70 pound, 100 pound bows at the high end, the breaking point is so far above that that I don't think there needs to be a trade in strand count when you get a heavier bow, unless what you're looking for is more gentle on the string groups. So, yes, more strands is stronger, but I've actually never seen a string break just like because of the tension. It's either broken because it was cut or worn out in the loop or something like that. But I've never seen a string break because it was too few strands. What we do is for B-55, we do a 12 strand string. D97 14 strand and 652 Spectra. We do a 16 strand strand string. That's just our standard that we do. We can make them however many strands people want, but that's kind of the standard that we do that works for basically all bows. Now, I could be off on the strand count stuff. If you know why a higher strand count was recommended for higher draw weight bows, let me know in the comments. I'd be really curious to hear what you guys think on it. >> You'll see that this one has a much rounder or smoother appearance on the outside because there are more fibers within this bundle. The fewer fibers you have, the more these little valleys and peaks are. So, it's actually not round anymore. Now, this is really interesting. I think this would be true if the strands were cables and they they were just solid. And so the smaller little cables you have, the more symmetrical string you have. But the strands aren't cables, they're fibers. And fibers smoosh. You know what I'm saying? Like personally, I don't see a difference in the roundness of a B-55, which is a very thick diameter for a string, and a 652 Spectra, which is a very thin. They seem equally round to me. if you nail the back twist when you're building the string. So that means when the string's done with the two loops and you haven't twisted the middle together, there's no twist in the string. So when you twist the middle together, it becomes one. And in my opinion, it seems perfectly round. I haven't tested it. I'm just sharing an opinion there. It could actually make a difference, but it's hard to test because when you do a smaller diameter of the exact same material, for example, D97 and 8125, exact same material, different diameters, 8125 stretches a lot less. And so it'd be hard to do a test where you change the diameter. Anyways, that's not the point. Point is, I don't think it matters um as far as smaller versus thicker strands and what you're looking for when you're getting string material. I hope this helped some people out, added some more context to the traditional community of what you should look for when you're looking for a bow string and bowring material. If you have any questions, let me know in the comments or you can shoot us an email at contactshhatterproof archery.com and we are happy to help in any way we can. Thank you so much for watching.